Microsoft announces Nokia Lumia 530, priced at €85 / $115

Earlier this year, Nokia announced the Lumia 630, which it has recently been launching in markets around the world. It was positioned as the "new entry-level Windows Phone 8.1 device", and it's a pretty good one too - although it's not perfect, as we discovered in our recent review. Nonetheless, the 630 is certainly affordable, but an even cheaper Lumia has now arrived.

Microsoft today announced the Nokia Lumia 530, which slots in below the 630 in its range. It features a 4-inch LCD with FWVGA (854x480px) resolution, a quad-core 1.2GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon 200 processor, 512MB of RAM and 4GB of onboard storage (along with a microSD slot, which accepts cards up to 128GB). 

There's a 5MP camera on the back too, although there's no flash and no front-facing camera either. It includes a 1430mAh battery (Nokia's BL-5J, which it also used in the earlier Lumia 520), which the company says is good for up to 22 days of standby time on the new device, along with up to 13.4 hours of talk time and 51 hours of music playback time. 

Four colour options are available - bright green, bright orange, white and dark grey. Like many other devices in the Lumia range, the 530 features interchangeable shells, so the colours can be changed as desired. 

The Lumia 530 is the most affordable Nokia Windows Phone ever, and the first to be launched at a sub-€100 EUR price point. When it goes on sale in August, the single-SIM model will be priced at just €85 EUR (around $115 USD / £67 GBP) before taxes and subsidies, while the dual-SIM variant will go on sale for "under €100" ($134 / £79). Exact local pricing may vary in each market. 

The new device is the first to represent Microsoft's push into the very lowest price points previously covered by its Asha devices, which, as the company recently announced, it plans to discontinue in the coming months. 

images via Microsoft

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

$10 Xbox credit for those that pre-order 'Halo: The Master Chief Collection'

Next Story

Microsoft launches GoPro Channel on Xbox One

34 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

512MB is insta No-Buy

They could have upped the price by $20 but included 1GB of RAM.

So with 512 MB, the users of 530 will have to wait each time a good game or app is released which only supports 1GB at launch. Wait for devs to release 512 MB version. That would be a painful experience.

The Nokia 630/635 is also stuck with 512MB. After that you jump to the Lumia 930 with 2GB of RAM. There needs to be more middle-ground. A WP device with specs like the Moto G.

If Microsoft can lower the cost of a WP 8.1 to or close to the price of Asha device.... Why not?

Who would want a dumb phone for the same price of a smartphone?

I wish they would put 1GB of RAM in and drop the cpu to dual core. I doubt people will notice the cpu difference with WP but they will notice when their apps "resume".

Thats pretty much what the 525 was I think. I would imagine though that Nokia is going to drop in the 830 variant soon which would be the mid range with 1gb ram, front facing camera etc.

The 530 and 630 are just supposed to be the value options, barebones nothing more

AR556 said,
I wish they would put 1GB of RAM in and drop the cpu to dual core. I doubt people will notice the cpu difference with WP but they will notice when their apps "resume".

AFAIK the four core Snapdragon 200 is less expensive than the dual core Snapdragon S4.

Sounds good, but I would have wanted to see a 1GB version. Those apps (games mostly?) that require 1GB of ram, still won't run with 512MB, quad core or not.

Well, this one is starting off cheaper than the 520 did from what I remember, I think the 520 started off over $100 and then quickly dropped under that amount.

I wish they'd have the low end with 1GB at least though, this could turn around and hurt them and maybe force them to push out a 535 with 1GB like the 525 before it.

Yeah, that sounds right, I knew I remembered it that way. Just means this will go lower quicker than the 520 and should sell more.

pratnala said,
What's the difference between 530 and 630?

The 630 has a bigger screen (4.5 inch), bigger battery (1830mAh) and a Snapdragon 400 (still 1.2 Ghz and quad-core though).

Sszecret said,

The 630 has a bigger screen (4.5 inch), bigger battery (1830mAh) and a Snapdragon 400 (still 1.2 Ghz and quad-core though).

I might be wrong, I'd have to check but I think the main difference between the 200 and 400 other than CPU speed is the GPU speed. 400 should obviously have the faster GPU of the two.

George P said,

I might be wrong, I'd have to check but I think the main difference between the 200 and 400 other than CPU speed is the GPU speed. 400 should obviously have the faster GPU of the two.

From what I can see on the official site, there's no mention of GPU speed, only CPU speed. What strikes me as odd is that it says under the 400 CPU "Up to 1.7 GHz dual core" and the L630 has a 400 1.2Ghz quad core.

Sszecret said,

The 630 has a bigger screen (4.5 inch), bigger battery (1830mAh) and a Snapdragon 400 (still 1.2 Ghz and quad-core though).

...and 8 GB internal storage on 630, instead of 530's 4 GB.

From what I can see on the official site, there's no mention of GPU speed, only CPU speed. What strikes me as odd is that it says under the 400 CPU "Up to 1.7 GHz dual core" and the L630 has a 400 1.2Ghz quad core.

No need to mention it either.

Snapdragon 200 (quad-core A7): Adreno 302 GPU
Snapdragon 400 (quad-core A7): Adreno 305 GPU

"Up to X GHz" means that a device manufacturer can clock it up to that frequency, but it doesn't mean they always will. Sometimes they reduce the max speed to reduce power consumption I think.

Sszecret said,

From what I can see on the official site, there's no mention of GPU speed, only CPU speed. What strikes me as odd is that it says under the 400 CPU "Up to 1.7 GHz dual core" and the L630 has a 400 1.2Ghz quad core.

The Adreno 305 that's in the Snapdragon 400 is clocked at 450Mhz, I'm betting the 302 is clocked at 400Mhz, and as far as raw performance goes (GFLOPS) the 302 does 12.8GFLOPS and the 305 can do between 19 and 21GFLOPS.

So again, it's down to the better GPU performance on the 400 verse the 200 Snapdragons.

George P said,

The Adreno 305 that's in the Snapdragon 400 is clocked at 450Mhz, I'm betting the 302 is clocked at 400Mhz, and as far as raw performance goes (GFLOPS) the 302 does 12.8GFLOPS and the 305 can do between 19 and 21GFLOPS.

So again, it's down to the better GPU performance on the 400 verse the 200 Snapdragons.

Also Cortex A5 vs A7. Thats another huge difference

Silver47 said,

Also Cortex A5 vs A7. Thats another huge difference

There are quad-core A7 snapdragon 200s too. GSMArena says 530's cores are A7, but they've been wrong before.

Hopefully not A5, because not only they're pretty weak, the GPU is quite weak too; an Adreno 203.

So the main differences between 520 and 530 are the Windows 8.1, virtual (onscreen) buttons and the round corners?

venejo said,
So the main differences between 520 and 530 are the Windows 8.1, virtual (onscreen) buttons and the round corners?

The Snapdragon CPU is different, iirc the 520 has a dual core S4 and this has a quad core Snapdragon 200. Rest of it is the same though, so we're really talking performance bust, dual sim option (520 didn't have one IIRC?) and that it comes with the newest version of Windows Phone.

venejo said,
So the main differences between 520 and 530 are the Windows 8.1, virtual (onscreen) buttons and the round corners?

Is the 520 not going to be upgraded to Windows 8.1?

Shadrack said,

Is the 520 not going to be upgraded to Windows 8.1?

They all should be upgraded to 8.1 but if you're on a carrier like AT&T who knows when?

George P said,

They all should be upgraded to 8.1 but if you're on a carrier like AT&T who knows when?

My step-daughter has one and is on AT&T GoPhone... yeah, who knows? That kinda sucks. I remember when Windows Phone 7 was in development MS was suggesting that they would have more control over the updates than the carriers (like Apple does with iPhone). Baffles the mind how good of a deal Apple has it with the carriers while all the other OEMs must bow down.